Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37090151›Full record

ArticleJournal of global infectious diseases

Performance of Aerosol Boxes for Endotracheal Intubation during the COVID-19 Pandemic with Systematic Review.

R Ajay Christopher, Aparna Lohanathan, Darpanarayan Hazra, Rathijit Pal, Vaishnavi Vegiraju, Kundavaram Paul Prabhakar Abhilash

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global infectious diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

R Ajay ChristopherDepartment of Emergency Medicine, CMC, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Aparna LohanathanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, CMC, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Darpanarayan HazraDepartment of Emergency Medicine, CMC, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Rathijit PalDepartment of Emergency Medicine, CMC, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Vaishnavi VegirajuDepartment of Emergency Medicine, CMC, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Kundavaram Paul Prabhakar AbhilashDepartment of Emergency Medicine, CMC, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Christian Medical College & Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, endotracheal intubation using an aerosol box (AB) became the norm in the emergency department (ED) and the intensive care unit. We compared two models of AB with different dimensions to compare and identify a device that helps in reducing viral exposure without compromising successful airway management. Methods: We conducted this prospective observational study for 7 months (October 20-April 21) on 143 patients presenting with an acute airway compromise to the ED. All intubations were performed using one of the two models available. The primary outcome was time taken for intubation (TTI). Results: The overall median time taken to intubate using any AB was 63 (interquartile range [IQR]: 46.2-87.7) s with an 81.9% first-pass success (FPS) rate. TTI for AB I was 67 (IQR: 53-106) s with a 76.3% FPS rate, while TTI for AB II was 57 (IQR: 44-75) s with an 85.9% FPS rate. TTI was much shorter without the use of an AB (34: IQR: 24-53 s) with a 92% FPS rate. Intubations done by emergency physicians with more than 2 years of experience were faster in both with or without AB when compared to intubations done by physicians with <2 years of experience. Conclusion: The use of an AB is associated with a longer TTI when compared to intubations done without an AB. TTI was relatively shorter when more experienced emergency physicians performed intubation. FPS rates were low with intubations done using AB.

Indexed as

Aerosol boxairway managementCOVID-19personal protective equipmentrapid sequence intubationsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37090151
PMCPMC10118207
OpenAlexW4322707759

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.